Cited by 214School Choice and PerformanceIntergenerational and Educational Inequality StudiesEarly Childhood Education and Development

Inequality in Reading and Math Skills Forms Mainly before Kindergarten: A Replication, and Partial Correction, of “Are Schools the Great Equalizer?”

Open access
von Hippel, Paul T., Workman, Joseph, Downey, Douglas B.·2018·Sociology of Education

Abstract

When do children become unequal in reading and math skills? Some research claims that inequality grows mainly before school begins. Some research claims that schools cause inequality to grow. And some research-including the 2004 study "Are Schools the Great Equalizer?"-claims that inequality grows mainly during summer vacations. Unfortunately, the test scores used in the Great Equalizer study suffered from a measurement artifact that exaggerated estimates of inequality growth. In addition, the Great Equalizer study is dated and its participants are no longer school-aged. In this article, we replicate the Great Equalizer study using better test scores in both the original data and a newer cohort of children. When we use the new test scores, we find that variance is substantial at the start of kindergarten and does not grow but actually shrinks over the next two to three years. This finding, which was not evident in the original Great Equalizer study, implicates the years before kindergarten as the primary source of inequality in elementary reading and math. Total score variance grows during most summers and shrinks during most school years, suggesting that schools reduce inequality overall. Changes in inequality are small after kindergarten and do not replicate consistently across grades, subjects, or cohorts. That said, socioeconomic gaps tend to shrink during the school year and grow during the summer, while the black-white gap tends to follow the opposite pattern.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0038040718801760

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
von Hippel, P. T., Workman, J., & Downey, D. B.
Affiliations
  • University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA
  • University of Missouri–Kansas City (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
Venue
Sociology of Education
Published
2018-09-27
Volume
91
Issue
4
Pages
323-357
ISSN
  • 0038-0407 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-8573
OpenAlex
W2893396925
Cited by
214
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 4
FWCI
72.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sociology of Education (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Russell Sage Foundation (83-16-05)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
Keywords
educational inequality, reading skills, mathematical skills, summer learning loss, measurement artifacts, socioeconomic gap, black-white gap, early childhood, kindergarten, replication, elementary school

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review